[cfe-dev] [llvm-dev] llvm and clang are getting slower
Mehdi Amini via cfe-dev
cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Mar 8 09:40:47 PST 2016
Thanks for sharing. We also noticed this internally, and I know that Bruno and Chris are working on some infrastructure and tooling to help tracking closely compile time regressions.
We had this conversation internally about the tradeoff between compile-time and runtime performance, and I planned to bring-up the topic on the list in the coming months, this looks like a good occasion to plant the seed. Apparently in the past (years/decade ago?) the project was very conservative on adding any optimizations that would impact compile time, however there is no explicit policy (that I know of) to address this tradeoff.
The closest I could find would be what Chandler wrote in: http://reviews.llvm.org/D12826 ; for instance for O2 he stated that "if an optimization increases compile time by 5% or increases code size by 5% for a particular benchmark, that benchmark should also be one which sees a 5% runtime improvement".
My hope is that with better tooling for tracking compile time in the future, we'll reach a state where we'll be able to consider "breaking" the compile-time regression test as important as breaking any test: i.e. the offending commit should be reverted unless it has been shown to significantly (hand wavy...) improve the runtime performance.
With the current trend, the Polly developers don't have to worry about improving their compile time, we'll catch up with them ;)
> On Mar 8, 2016, at 8:13 AM, Rafael Espíndola via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> I have just benchmarked building trunk llvm and clang in Debug,
> Release and LTO modes (see the attached scrip for the cmake lines).
> The compilers used were clang 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, 3.8 and trunk. In all
> cases I used the system libgcc and libstdc++.
> For release builds there is a monotonic increase in each version. From
> 163 minutes with 3.5 to 212 minutes with trunk. For comparison, gcc
> 5.3.2 takes 205 minutes.
> Debug and LTO show an improvement in 3.7, but have regressed again in 3.8.
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
More information about the cfe-dev